Mario Luberto

La riforma della data retention a fini di contrasto della criminalità

Introduction

La riforma della data retention a fini di contrasto della criminalità. Riforma italiana data retention (DL 132/2021) per contrasto alla criminalità. Analisi impatto su diritti fondamentali, sorveglianza digitale e conformità a sentenze UE.

Abstract

Con il D.L. n. 132 del 30.09.2021, convertito con modificazioni dalla L. n. 178 del 23.11.2021, il legislatore italiano ha profondamente modificato l’art. 132 D.lgs. n.196 del 30.06.2003, ovvero la disposizione dedicata alla conservazione ed all’acquisizione dei dati di traffico telefonico e telematico a fini di prevenzione e contrasto della criminalità (c.d. data retention). Come risulta anche dal testo del decreto legge, la riforma è stata generata dalla pronuncia della Grande sezione della Corte di Giustizia UE del 2.3.2021 (causa C-746/18, H.K. contro Prokuratuur). Il contributo, dopo aver delineato i tratti dell’istituto in questione ed aver ripercorso i principali arresti della Corte di Giustizia in materia di data retention, si propone di mettere in luce come le modifiche legislative apportate non soltanto appaiano in linea con l’evoluzione delle tecnologie utilizzate a fini di sorveglianza digitale, ma rappresentino altresì un significativo passo in avanti nella garanzia dei diritti fondamentali. L’articolo si sofferma infine su alcune criticità della disciplina, non risolte dall’intervento riformatore qui commentato.

Review

This article provides a timely and pertinent analysis of the recent reform of data retention legislation in Italy, specifically addressing the modifications to Article 132 of Legislative Decree 196/2003 following Decree-Law No. 132 of 2021. The paper adeptly contextualizes this national legislative development within the broader European legal landscape, explicitly linking it to the pivotal ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union in *H.K. v. Prokuratuur* (C-746/18). Its primary objective is to critically examine how these legislative changes, driven by EU jurisprudence, seek to balance the imperative of combating crime with the protection of fundamental rights in an increasingly digital surveillance environment. The author's approach is commendable, systematically outlining the evolution of data retention provisions and meticulously tracing the key judgments of the CJEU that have shaped this contentious area. A significant strength of the contribution lies in its assertion that the implemented legislative modifications not only demonstrate an alignment with advancements in digital surveillance technologies but also constitute a "significant step forward" in safeguarding fundamental rights. This positive assessment is crucial, as it suggests the Italian legislature has made earnest efforts to comply with European legal standards while adapting to contemporary technological realities. The analysis therefore offers valuable insights into the practical application of complex legal principles at the national level. While highlighting the progressive aspects of the reform, the article demonstrates scholarly rigor by not shying away from identifying remaining "critical issues" within the new framework that the intervention has not fully resolved. This balanced perspective adds considerable weight to its findings, signaling areas where further legislative refinement or judicial interpretation may be necessary. Overall, the paper serves as an essential resource for academics, practitioners, and policymakers interested in the delicate interplay between national security, technological evolution, and the protection of individual liberties in the context of data retention. It provides a comprehensive and nuanced evaluation of a complex legal reform, offering both an appreciation of its advancements and a candid assessment of its ongoing challenges.

Full Text

Comments

You need to be logged in to post a comment.